DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[worktoplay]

frog...I have previously expressed my thoughts that the Dutton report answered many of the questions in the shareholder list. Secondly, I believe the company has given us evidence that they are aware of the list:

http://host.wallstreetcity.com/wsc2/Autoflag.html?Button=Get+Story&DB=SQL&SID=161p0313&S....

"We are pleased to be covered by JM Dutton Associates. It is an independent review that reinforces what I saw at DNAPrint(TM) when I was invited to join the board of directors and then lead the Company as its Chief Executive Officer and President," said Richard Gabriel, CEO and President of DNAPrint genomics, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: DNAP). "Over the last year, we have been reorganizing and strengthening our Company with much-needed cash flow. There is no doubt that DNAPrint has been on the cutting edge of the genomics revolution, proving that you don't need to burn hundreds of millions of dollars to build a technology foothold in an emerging market. What you do need is a dedicated team of smart researchers and managers, committed to the health and success of the Company. We are beginning to emerge from a very difficult period in the Company's development, and we are aggressively seeking opportunities to put our capital to work. What our shareholders should realize is that our recent capital raising transaction is well within line of what a traditional Venture Capital deal would take in terms of equity dilution. We are doing everything we can to help boost our shareholders' confidence and build real underlying stock values."

IMO, these statements, especially the last, speak directly to some of the questions the shareholders raised concerning the funding decision. Its inclusion in the Dutton PR, put out by the company, signalled to me that they have the list. It certainly wasn't included to address "potential" shareholders, but existing ones.

The list was first proposed as a means of allowing the company to answer investor concerns at the shareholder meeting. While I was suspicious of the intent of the people initiating the effort, I saw no harm, and to the contrary, thought there was merit in presenting a comprehensive list in advance of the meeting. However, my initial reservations are seemingly being played out now that the emphasis on the boards seems to have shifted to using it as a means to criticize corporate communications.

As a long shareholder, I am more than happy allowing the company to address the issues at the meeting. And I would respectfully suggest that to provide the answers in other than a formal company newsletter, or at the company shareholder meeting, would not be an appropriate method of disseminating information.

Finally, with the meeting only about a month away, I doubt the company is interested in presenting answers, at this time, to the myriad of questions asked. If they were to do that, it would pretty much eliminate the need for a meeting...lol I suggest that we wait.

Later,
W2P